Comments on: A ‘new’ GOP on its way?http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/05/20/a-new-gop-on-its-way/
Politics and policy from inside WashingtonTue, 14 Oct 2014 12:57:43 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.3By: HBChttp://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/05/20/a-new-gop-on-its-way/comment-page-1/#comment-8268
Fri, 21 May 2010 02:42:12 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/?p=3870#comment-8268It’s interesting that anybody might see virtue in coalescing with the likes of Jim de Mint who is one of biggest scenery-chewing scam artists in political history.

If that’s the best the GOP has going for it, then they’d better be stocking up on industrial-strength deodorant.

]]>By: Scarybarryhttp://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/05/20/a-new-gop-on-its-way/comment-page-1/#comment-8266
Thu, 20 May 2010 20:54:44 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/?p=3870#comment-8266Rand Paul will smoke Jack Conway in November, without question. And the race isn’t about the Tea Party vs. GOP or Tea Party vs. the Left. It’s about smaller Gov’t, fiscal responsibility and an out of control Dem Congress and Administration. Jack Conway is Big Gov’t and more unsustainable entitlement spending. Plus there will be no rift with McConnell or the GOP. It’s all media wishes and hype. So that’s the story in KY. Somebody else can tell us what’s happening on the streets of CA, AK or wherever else the Dems are scrambling. BTW, please stop using that derogatory term for Tea Partiers. It shows a lack of class and total disrespect.
]]>By: CDNrebelhttp://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/05/20/a-new-gop-on-its-way/comment-page-1/#comment-8265
Thu, 20 May 2010 19:35:07 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/?p=3870#comment-8265Looking at the recount, Rand Paul had less votes than the Dem nominee that won – will look closer at the other races but I would imagine it’s not quite so clear cut (except for Boxer). That being said, I don’t think that the Tea-Bagger manifesto makes a whole lot of sense in that it’s an extremist set of ideas that really only appeal to people who are pissed off royally. And extremism in any direction is finally destructive. I think if they were really budget hawks they would be screaming about getting troops out of Iraq ($500B per year) and cutting SS and medicare off completely for retire-ys who earned well above (maybe 50% above) median income during their careers ($300B). That’s $800B right there; factor in a marginal improvement in the economy and/or a smallish VAT (say 3-5%) and that sews up the budget gap. Why do people think it has to be so complicated? I guess a freeze on new spending initiatives should be added as a safety valve too… call it a moratorium until budget is balanced (probably 5 yrs) – THAT will bring investment and growth back to America fast.
Once budget is balanced and investment is strong, then the gov’t can tit for tat reduce expenditures and cut taxes, then more real-world robust growth can occur. The idea that subsidizing mega-corps via tax-cuts will speed up the process is laughable – all they will do is pass the money on to shareholders (or their executives), not hire more.
]]>